3 ms·
As a software engineer, the idea of streaming video to listen to music (ignoring video output) hurts my soul. You're wasting all those bits! In a normal world
by naner 14y ago
As a software engineer, the idea of streaming video to listen to music (ignoring video output) hurts my soul. You're wasting all those bits!
In a normal world it wouldn't make much sense to allow video to keep playing while the screen is unavailable. I guess in our world, however, Youtube is one of the few reliable sorta-legal sources of free music.
- nerdo 14y agoDoes it cost anything to display a static image? (which is what most youtube songs are)
- baddox 14y agoBased on my naive understanding of compressed video, it would still send full keyframes every x frames, but the diffs between keyframes should be minimal.
- SquareWheel 14y agoI'd be less worried about that and more worried about the fact that you're using a video compression algorithm on music. That's not optimal! We have plenty of music streaming services, Youtube seems like an odd choice.
- brigade 14y agoThe audio is still compressed using AAC or Vorbis at somewhere around 96-128 kbps depending on format... Youtube has really good recommendations, doesn't need flash, and has a huge selection and existing community. Worse is better™
- vindvaki 14y agoI'm pretty sure that the soundtrack is compressed using some conventional audio compression scheme. Usually, the audio and video are kind of separate streams, which are synchronized by the player using information provided by the container. For example, Matroska video files (*.mkv) are codec independent ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroska http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroska ).